Russia and Ukraine

[The Grand Nudger]

[The Architect Of Fate]

[Deesse23]

Actually, if nukes are used, which is unlikely, but if they are,

....and still you like to throw te ukrainian nation under the bus. You are even more of a coward as i previously thought. Or liar? Or Both?

[Leonardo17]

[Leonardo17]

It was so nice of Bel to hand the Baton of BS off to IA.

I just came into the thread to correct Thump who besmirched my name by saying I was wrong about the peace deal being scuttled by NATO. And now, Thump's new claim is that the former PM of Israel knows nothing about what's going on in the world, and that we have to take world leaders words like that with a grain of salt, proving that Thump knows even less about the world than I thought he did before. He's absolutely clueless.

And as far as accusations by Helios like saying I want Ukraine to bend over and give up, I didn't write any such thing. Ukrainians can fight all they'd like and I respect whatever decision they make. I just don't see it as my fight. They can fight all they want, without my weapons. NATO protections are my privilege, not theirs, and they are not to be handed out like candy. No, Ukrainians don't get special treatment from me because they have blonde hair and blue eyes. I can't help bring freedom to the people of Uganda, Yemen, North Korea, and the people of over 100 other nations, so yeah, I'm kind of just treating Ukraine with equality here, while people go on the news talking about how sad it is to see a country of blue eyed people under attack.

On cultural / ethnic differences:
 
As far as I know, the Europeans were ready to intervene during the Syrian war at some point between 2012 and 2015 and were waiting for a sign from the Obama administration. So originally this was going to be the spot where Putin’s expansionist ambitions were going to be stopped. But there was a change of plan and they didn’t do it.
 
2) You cannot compare everything with everything else. The NATO intervention in Korea seems to have had a positive outcome. The US intervention in Vietnam doesn’t. The Russian intervention in Afghanistan could have paid off well (that’s my point of view) but it became something no one is able to solve even today because of US weapons that were delivered to the Talibans (which were used against US forces two decades later). Another completely messed up policy is the middle-east in general. I think it’s up to political scientists to deliver logical explanations on these issues.
 
I personally think that our moral obligation to support Ukrainians comes from this: See, The Afghan president just picked his car, his dollars and fled to India when the Taliban came. All that US cash and military equipment just went to corruption. For whatever reason, no one fired a single shot on these monsters when they simply took the country without any form resistance. It was like the people wanted the Taliban. So although it was not my tax money, I don’t really get what the US did in that place during 20 years. I simply don’t get it
 
Ukraine is different. You could not help them now. Then they would still fight and the result would be something like Belarus, with Russia threatening Baltic countries, Georgia, Poland, Moldova etc. But they would still be resisting in some way so the result would be another Syria-like region that is being thorn out by inner conflicts for the decades to come.
 
So if you want stability in Europe (and that’s also in your interest) you have to neutralize Russia there, in one way or the other. Or that’s how I see it

[Irreligious Atheist]

[Irreligious Atheist]

Nah the Canadian gov can't get towtrucks unless they enact the Emergencies Act. Our towtrucks are owned by the good patriotic Canadians who refused to tow away the truckers until they were threatened under the emergencies act. I'm talking about war tanks.

Yes...you're talking about war tanks which are not yours.  They are not your weapons.  Not only did you not design them, you had to ask for permission to even given them away.  You make your own country the punchline of a joke.  Gratz.

Fair enough. But I have NATO privilege, so you have to protect me, daddy. You take care of me so well.

[Irreligious Atheist]

Actually, if nukes are used, which is unlikely, but if they are,

....and still you like to throw te ukrainian nation under the bus. You are even more of a coward as i previously thought. Or liar? Or Both?

Words like unlikely and likely mean very little on their own. If there is even a 1 percent chance or .5 % chance Russia uses nukes, that's a big enough chance for me to take serious note. I think in terms of the long game. If we keep having nuclear showdowns like this where there's even a .5 percent chance something happens, and we do this over and over again for the next thousand years or two thousand years or 5 thousand years, then eventually, shit hits the fan and it's mutually assured destruction, and it's game over. That's why I take nukes seriously. Not because Russia is going to bomb me and end my life. I don't think of things in those terms. I don't fear death. I'm ready if today is my day. I have seriously bad anxiety, so I fear life more than death. Dying at the hands of a nuke is the last thing I'm personally worried about lol.

Edit: And I forgot to mention the prospect of a country being under the false impression that they are being nuked, and then responding in kind. We've had close calls before. That Russian dude saved us by not firing off that nuke when he was ordered to. Shit like that happens as well, and we are so lucky that that man decided to not fire the nuke.

[The Grand Nudger]

Yes...you're talking about war tanks which are not yours.  They are not your weapons.  Not only did you not design them, you had to ask for permission to even given them away.  You make your own country the punchline of a joke.  Gratz.

Fair enough. But I have NATO privilege, so you have to protect me, daddy. You take care of me so well.

The only inalienable right a soldier has is the right to fail.  That's worth keeping in mind, especially if you're the kind of person who, in life as on the boards, makes it known you wouldn't lift a finger to defend someone else, thinks it's wrong to help those people, and even think that their invaders have moral warrant.  People like that have a tendency of finding themselves surrounded by people who could take care of them, are even supposed to take care of them, but elect not to.

What do you think the us should do if the uk asserts a territorial and adminstrative claim over canadia? Occupies your block, loots your room, declares martial law, punishes "bigoted" speech with internment, conscripts you as proxy infantry against your own territorial defense forces? Should we get out of the uks way? Should we send them more missiles when they ask? Should we offer the use of our own forces at your open southern border?

[Irreligious Atheist]